[Interviewer]: Part of your work here at Trinity has been working with priests involved in abuse, no?

[Father Groeschel]: A little bit, yes; but you know, in those cases,
they have to leave. And some of them profoundly — profoundly —
penitential, horrified. People have this picture in their minds of a
person planning to — a psychopath. But that's not the case. Suppose you
have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 — is the seducer.

[Interviewer]: Why would that be?

[Father Greoschel]: Well, it's not so hard to see — a kid looking for a
father and didn't have his own — and they won't be planning to get into
heavy-duty sex, but almost romantic, embracing, kissing, perhaps
sleeping but not having intercourse or anything like that.

It's an understandable thing, and you know where you find it, among
other clergy or important people; you look at teachers, attorneys,
judges, social workers. Generally, if they get involved, it's
heterosexually, and if it's a priest, he leaves and gets married —
that's the usual thing — and gets a dispensation. A lot of priests leave
quickly, get civilly married and then apply for the dispensation, which
takes about three years.

But there are the relatively rare cases where a priest is involved in a
homosexual way with a minor. I think the statistic I read recently in a
secular psychology review was about 2%. Would that be true of other
clergy? Would it be true of doctors, lawyers, coaches?

Here's this poor guy — [Penn State football coach Jerry] Sandusky — it
went on for years. Interesting: Why didn't anyone say anything?
Apparently, a number of kids knew about it and didn't break the ice.
Well, you know, until recent years, people did not register in their
minds that it was a crime. It was a moral failure, scandalous; but they
didn't think of it in terms of legal things.

If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties —
except for rape or violence — it was very rarely brought as a civil
crime. Nobody thought of it that way. Sometimes statutory rape would be —
but only if the girl pushed her case. Parents wouldn't touch it. People
backed off, for years, on sexual cases. I'm not sure why.

I think perhaps part of the reason would be an embarrassment, that it
brings the case out into the open, and the girl's name is there, or
people will figure out what's there, or the youngster involved — you
know, it's not put in the paper, but everybody knows; they're talking
about it.

At this point, (when) any priest, any clergyman, any social worker, any
teacher, any responsible person in society would become involved in a
single sexual act — not necessarily intercourse — they're done. And I'm
inclined to think, on their first offense, they should not go to jail
because their intention was not committing a crime.

De excuses die snel werden gemaakt:

Eerst het online magazine:
Child sexual abuse is never excusable. The editors of the National
Catholic Register apologize for publishing without clarification or
challenge Father Benedict Groeschel's comments that seem to suggest that
the child is somehow responsible for abuse. Nothing could be further
from the truth. Our publication of that comment was an editorial
mistake, for which we sincerely apologize. Given Father Benedict's
stellar history over many years, we released his interview without our
usual screening and oversight. We have removed the story. We have sought
clarification from Father Benedict.
Jeanette R. De Melo
Editor in Chief

Statement from the Community of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal:
The Community of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal sincerely
apologizes for the comments made by Fr. Benedict Groeschel in an
interview released August 27 by the National Catholic Register. In that
interview, Fr. Benedict made comments that were inappropriate and
untrue. A child is never responsible for abuse. Any abuser of a child is
always responsible, especially a priest. Sexual abuse of a minor is a
terrible crime and should always be treated as such. We are sorry for
any pain his comments may have caused. Fr. Benedict has dedicated his
life to helping others and these comments were completely out of
character. He never intended to excuse abuse or implicate the victims.
We hope that these unfortunate statements will not overshadow the great
good Fr. Benedict has done in housing countless homeless people, feeding
innumerable poor families, and bringing healing, peace and
encouragement to so many.
Fr Benedict helped found our community 25 years ago with the hope of
bringing the healing peace of Jesus Christ to our wounded world. Our
desire has always been to lift-up humanity and never to hurt. About
seven years ago Fr. Benedict was struck by a car and was in a coma for
over a month. In recent months his health, memory and cognitive ability
have been failing. He has been in and out of the hospital. Due to his
declining health and inability to care for himself, Fr. Benedict had
moved to a location where he could rest and be relieved of his
responsibilities. Although these factors do not excuse his comments,
they help us understand how such a compassionate man could have said
something so wrong, so insensitive, and so out of character. Our prayers
are with all those who have been hurt by his comments, especially
victims of sexual abuse.

Statement from Fr Benedict:
I apologize for my comments. I did not intend to blame the victim. A
priest (or anyone else) who abuses a minor is always wrong and is always
responsible. My mind and my way of expressing myself are not as clear
as they used to be. I have spent my life trying to help others the best
that I could. I deeply regret any harm I have caused to anyone.